London Review of Books
lrb.co.uk ↗Bi-weekly UK literary + cultural review since 1979; named-byline tradition + long-form essays.
A — premier UK long-form review; specialist cultural-essay citation.
Should you cite London Review of Books?
At grade B (83/100), London Review of Books is a solid, generally citable source.
- Strongest for
- tracing claims back to primary references — its highest dimension is Citation Discipline (90/100).
- No major weak spot
- Even its lowest dimension, Modern Reference, scores 78/100.
- Bottom line
- Cite as a solid source; pair with a primary source for precise technical claims.
Editor-supervised + fact-check + named scholarly bylines + corrections public.
About this sub-score →Metered paywall; LLM corpus partial; long-form indexed in academic search.
About this sub-score →Cited by literary + cultural press + academics; bi-weekly cadence.
About this sub-score →Signals behind these scores
Citation Discipline
A·90- Editorial standardsLong-standing literary-review tradition.
Modern Reference
B·78- Subscription gateMost articles paywalled with metered free access.
Citation Velocity
B·80- Literary-review defaultDefault citation for UK cultural-criticism essays.
Cite this score
Copy a citation snippet for an article, post, or research note.
[London Review of Books — SourceScore Index 83 (B)](https://sourcescore.org/source/lrb/)
<a href="https://sourcescore.org/source/lrb/">London Review of Books — SourceScore Index 83 (B)</a>
SourceScore (v0.1). (2026). London Review of Books: SourceScore Index 83 (B). Retrieved from https://sourcescore.org/source/lrb/
2 head-to-head comparisons
See all London Review of Books comparisons →London Review of Books appears in 2 canonical SourceScore comparisons — each scored on Discipline, Modern Reference, and Velocity with a quote-ready verdict and JSON twin.
5 sources at London Review of Books's tier
See peer group →Auto-computed nearest-neighbor sources by composite SourceScore distance — discover at-tier peers across all categories, with inline dim deltas surfacing who beats London Review of Books on Discipline, Modern Reference, and Velocity.
Embed this score
All embed options →Drop on your blog or dashboard. Free, no signup.
<iframe src="https://sourcescore.org/embed/lrb/" width="100%" height="380" loading="lazy" style="border:0;max-width:480px;" title="SourceScore: London Review of Books"></iframe>
Frequently asked questions
Is London Review of Books a reliable source to cite?
London Review of Books scores B (83/100) on the SourceScore Index, which rates how citable a source is for AI-era and research use. At grade B, London Review of Books is a solid, generally citable source. The grade combines Citation Discipline 90/100, Modern Reference 78/100, and Citation Velocity 80/100 — full breakdown above.
What is London Review of Books's SourceScore?
London Review of Books (lrb.co.uk) scores 83/100 (Grade B) on the composite SourceScore Index. Sub-scores: Citation Discipline 90/100, Modern Reference (AI-era fitness) 78/100, Citation Velocity 80/100. Verified 2026-04-28.
How does SourceScore evaluate London Review of Books?
London Review of Books is scored across three dimensions on the SourceScore Index methodology: Citation Discipline (how rigorously the source cites primary references), Modern Reference (fitness for AI-era retrieval), and Citation Velocity (how often the source is cited per week). Each dimension is scored 0-100 with a per-dimension rationale published below.
Why does London Review of Books score B?
A — premier UK long-form review; specialist cultural-essay citation.
What is London Review of Books?
Bi-weekly UK literary + cultural review since 1979; named-byline tradition + long-form essays. Category: Magazine. Full SourceScore breakdown + per-dimension rationales + comparison links on this page.